Locals offer mixed reaction to troop withdrawal

Local residents offered a mixed reaction to President Barack Obama’s announcement Friday that he will withdraw troops from Iraq and end the eight-year war that has claimed the lives of more than 4,400 U.S. service members.

Donna Hogue, who makes throw blankets for wounded Iraq and Afghanistan veterans and lost her husband to the Vietnam War in 1964, said Friday by phone that the troop withdrawal is exciting news.

“I’m excited for the boys and I’m glad that they’re going to be brought home,” Hogue said. “Some of the guys here, they’ve served three or four tours of duty. That’s a lot. They have sacrificed a lot, but I know it was necessary. Their sacrifice should be applauded because the cost of freedom isn’t free.”

James Butcher, 28, a former airman in the U.S. Air Force, was enjoying a beer with his wife Friday evening at the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 147, 1401 S.W. Eighth Ave. He said he thought the withdrawal announcement was a political move by Obama to improve his approval rating. He said he did not think now was the time for a troop withdrawal.

“I don’t really like it,” Butcher said. “We’ve got a job to do. We need to be over there to do the job in more than one country. Libya isn’t going to be on their feet right off the bat. They need to have a show of support from America. Iraq’s the same way. Yeah, we did get Saddam a while ago, but I think there’s a job that needs to be done. We need to be over there and we need to show support for the countries.”

Butcher, who said he filled out his delayed enlistment papers as a high school senior in February 2001, said he believes the U.S. military needs to maintain a strong presence around the world to ensure safety at home. He said he does not necessarily think the country is safer than it was before Sept. 11, 2001.

“I think we’re about the same, safeness-wise,” Butcher said. “There’s always idiots that can come over here and blow up a plane. There’s always going to be a threat. I don’t really believe the safeness level has gone down any, but I don’t think it’s gone up either.”

Angie Burrows, of Lubbock, was standing near the gazebo at Memorial Park on South Washington Street Friday evening while her just-married sister took wedding photos. She said her stepson, Aaron Burrows, 28, is currently serving in the U.S. Army and is stationed in Iraq.

“It’s his fifth deployment,” she said.

She said she had not heard Obama’s announcement today, but said she was happy to hear the news.

“I hope it works out,” she said.

Burrows declined to comment on her opinion of the Iraq invasion and would not say if she thought now was a good time for the withdrawal. She said simply that she would be glad to see her stepson when he returned home.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Comment viewing options

Sort Comments

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

It's been more than 8 years since "Mission Accomplished!", almost 8 since Saddam Hussein's capture and nearly 5 since his execution. We've installed governments in post-war Iraq, staged elections and trained their troops while continuing to fight rebels and terrorists of several types. We've expended manpower, money and political capital in enormous quantities. What is the "job that needs to be done"? At some point, all babies have to be weaned and all fledglings fly or fall on their own. We don't need to be there forever. Just leave a sign: "Mess with us and we'll be back."

I learned tonight that Mitt Romney was asked in the last debate what he would do about Afghanistan, if he were POTUS. On the day of the tenth anniversary of the Afghan war, he said, "I'd form a committee to study the situation." Really? After ten years in government, he has to "study" the situation? He is as clueless as Herman Cain.

We don't need to be over there in more than one country. We don't need to be there in one country. We don't need to be there at all. Bring all the troops home and save trillions of dollars. Cut THAT out of the budget. Even republican candidate Ron Paul is against US presence in the middle east.

President Obama just got rid of a Libyan dictator without loss of American life or limb, in less than two years, and a heck of a lot less money than that spent any of the one of ten years during the - you know - the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield/Rove regime and their contrived war.

Bernie Sanders has just reported the information that contractors in the middle east have defrauded the American government out of more than a trillion dollars.

Another report shows the addiction of the Pentagon to fraudulent contractors.

CUT IT. I don't even want the "private security contractors" left there. We're talking about the old Blackwater, I am sure.

Bring home our troops and don't look back. Help the ones who survived this devastation.

I want every one home. But what some want may not be what we need. My greatest concern is what will Iran do? What about Pakistan? Make no mistake they are afraid of the power and might of the U.S., and when we are no longer near I think it is highly likely Iran will attempt to run Iraq. If that happens... our little recession will be nothing in comparison... the loss of life in the past 10 years will be nothing in comparison... and Obama's legacy will be one that caused great global peril... Anyone who thinks we can just isolate ourselves in the Western Hemisphere is naive to reality... and that idealism will put us into more danger than we can imagine...

Also, make no mistake. The withdrawal has been "blame" on the immunity issue. The U.S. has immunity agreements in every country that we have a presence. It is a standard process, and it is a negotiated process. We would have had immunity if this President wanted it. He is using this so he can "blame" the withdrawal on Iraq rather than take responsibility when it all goes to crap.

I and people all across the political spectrum worry about what will happen after the Americans leave Iraq, and particularly what Iran will try to do. The question is, will the aftermath be different if we stay another year? Five? Twenty? Both the Bush and Obama administrations have done everything they could to strengthen the "new" Iraqi government and military, but the results have been a lot less than hoped for. We probably will be unhappy with what follows. Unless we are willing to occupy Iraq forever, we need to let happen whatever happens. Internally, they can do whatever suits them, but we need to leave the clear message that we are prepared to turn Iraq into a parking lot if our interests are threatened.

The US involvement in Iraq has cost the US more than we will ever benefit from it. Foremost, the sacrifice of American lives was very costly and will have far reaching conseqences for years to come. The many wounded, disabled, disfigured and mentally damaged members of the military need now and are going to need well into the future our full support for the rest of their lives. This means we DO NOT FAIL THEM. Patriotism is far reaching. It is more than waving our flag and saying we support the troops when they were going off to combat. We can never forget the blood, sweat and tears they have shed for duty, honor and country. IT IS THE ULTIMATE SACRIFICE! SEMPER FI to all.

This was so well put that I thought it should be seen on this story also.
Hope you don't mind LG!!
It is well put and it's the rest of the Story!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Spin
By LibertarianGrandma | 10/21/11 - 02:31 pm
From the article:
"The U.S. said repeatedly this year it would entertain an offer from the Iraqis to have a small force stay behind, and the Iraqis said they would like American military help. But as the year wore on and the number of American troops that Washington was suggesting could stay behind dropped, it became increasingly clear that a U.S. troop presence was not a sure thing. The issue of legal protection for the Americans was the deal-breaker."

LG:
The administration could not make the deal - this is a diplomatic failure; we were booted out essentially. We wanted diplomatic immunity for those who would stay behind to further train and advise the Iraqis. Iraq refused and the administration had no choice but to pull the plug completely. This will cause a vacuum that Iran will fill as quickly as they can. Don't get me wrong, I want our troops home as soon as possible, today, yesterday in fact. However, this spin by the administration is just that, spin.

Thank God, our troops are coming home, this war has taken a toll on my family and other loved ones.

It's no wonder Islamofascists believe they can wait out the US. Leftists, in general, can't even remember 9/11 leading them to whine about the "unjust" war in Afghanistan. No one could reasonably expect them to remember the events from the end of the first Gulf War up to the beginning of the second Gulf War. Far too many in this country have neither the spine nor the fortitude to fight a war that can't be won in a few weeks. I shudder to think what today's liberals would say if we had to fight a war like WWII again.

As for comparisons with Libya, please spare us the illogical and intellectually dishonest talking points. The US did not "win" that war. Any claims to the contrary are outrageous. Dropping a few bombs does not constitute winning a war. There was an active revolution going on when we joined the war although there were no American interests at stake and we didn't have a dog in the fight. So, comparing the two very different situations is a total absurdity. I guess that is the norm for leftists in America today so I shouldn't be surprised.

I wonder if the leftists among us are going to still claim a victory in Libya when they trade one blood-thirsty dictator for another. I wonder if the leftists are going to claim victory in Libya when the Muslim Brotherhood takes over and resorts to terrorism to get its way.

5FF, things may very well go badly in Libya depending on who is able to wrestle control of their new government the same can be said for Iraq. The future is never certain, but there is a key difference between the Libya approach and the Iraq approach. Our involvement in Libya cost us 0 American lives, 2 billion dollars, and 8months of our time. Iraq has cost us over 4000 American lives, tens of thousands of injuries to our service men, over a trillion dollars, and 9yrs.

I know its hard for you and other conservatives to stomach that Obama is more effective and efficient in his foreign policy than that chicken hawk Bush but if you put your extreme bias aside for a moment and look at the facts its obvious. During Bush's watch thousands of Americans died on 9-11 and he never caught Bin Laden even after starting two wars and nearly 7 years of searching. In Obama's first term Bin Laden is at the bottom of the Ocean where he belongs and he was able to create political change in Libya with a very minimal cost to the US.

5FF, just out of curiosity what would Obama have to do in regards to foreign policy to please you? I suspect if Obama crapped golden bricks Conservatives would still call them turds.

Once again RILB, you compare two very, very different military actions and then proceed to draw conclusions based on a faulty comparison. I don't have the time to inform your idiocy nor do I have the time to address your ignorance. Suffice it to say that if the extent of your analysis of foreign policy and leadership is a comparison between Iraq and Libyan, you are more of a dolt than even I first believed.

Heck you tools can't even get your criteria for a just war straight. By your logic it was somehow unjust for Bush to enforce the peace agreement between Saddam and the UN which necessarily involved the US, but it was somehow just for Obama to involve the US in a war where there were no US interests at stake. Somehow with you tools Obama gets a pass for nation-building while Bush is accused of nation-building while enforcing UN sanctions.

You leftists are hypocrites to the nth degree, which no longer amazes me since I now realize most liberals reached their intellectual capacity in grade school which is why they have become the sheeple they are.

5ff, right, all Bush wanted to do was enforce UN sanctions, laughable. If that was true why did he not act through the UN? And why did he make such a case that Iraq was an immediate danger to the US because of those factious WMDs? By the way where are those WMDs? The Iraq war is the worst foreign policy disaster since Vietnam but Republicans like yourself believe if you continue to spin it and lie about it long enough that everyone will begin to think its was a stunning success.

RILB: 5ff, right, all Bush wanted to do was enforce UN sanctions, laughable. If that was true why did he not act through the UN?

I'm kind of at a loss to even argue with you, RILB, considering you are so ignorant of the history of the second Gulf War. Arguing with you is like arguing with someone who claims water isn't wet. Try as I might to give you the benefit of the doubt, I can't find any valid reason for you being so ignorant of history. At first I thought maybe you were too young to remember or realize what was going on, but that doesn't excuse you from using the intarnets and googles to educate yourself. Then, I thought maybe you had been indoctrinated by some commie pinko, but that doesn't excuse you from using the intarnets and googles to correct that indoctrination. I'm left with nothing.

Bush didn't go through the UN, huh? I fear for my country because of the stupidity of people like you. You remind me of a quote by C.S. Lewis, "Now the trouble about trying to make yourself stupider than you really are is that you very often succeed."

Read some history and then we can discuss it. Until then, I'm not going to wage a war of wits with an unarmed man.

"Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our mind". Bob Marley. “The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.” Albert Camus

Whenever I read these comments it is clear that you feel that fox news and rush are the learning tools of the right, I never watch fox and very seldom listen to rush and the others but I do Use the internet. I dont take anything someone says at face value untill I check it out. Do you guys/gals check anything out? If so Please go a little farther in your research, There is a butload of info out there that will open your eyes. When it comes to history there is NO excuse not to know the Facts/truth...use the same tool you use to spew the crap.

Now I Know that that was a waist of time but I just cant stand it when people make stupid comments when the answers are right in front of them.

He did not go through the UN. Resolution 1441 passed in Nov of 2002 did not authorize the war in Iraq. Bush didn't even try to make the wording such that it would. He caved on the wording of it without a fight even though he had convinced the democrats to "leave politics at the shoreline" and they gave him full authority to fight for stronger wording on 1441.

In 2003, Bush sought another resolution but with drew it on March 17, 2003 when it became clear that it would not pass. Other UN security council members made it clear that they felt things needed to be checked out much better to determine the threat level from Saddam.

The other UN security council nations were right it turned out. Saddam was not a threat.

Whenever possible I get my news from reading official documents. I read the Senate intelligence committee reports, the declassified portions anyway. I read that Dossier that Tony Blair put out and it made it clear that the sanctions were working, that was ignored btw. I read bills, I read laws, I read police reports lol Whenever possible I do not rely on the interpretation of anyone else. Some of you need to practice what you preach if you think that the UN authorized the war in Iraq.

"I now realize most liberals reached their intellectual capacity in grade school."

"you are so ignorant of the history of the second Gulf War. Arguing with you is like arguing with someone who claims water isn't wet. "

"I fear for my country because of the stupidity of people like you."

"I'm not going to wage a war of wits with an unarmed man."

"when they aren't being intellectually dishonest, they are being imbeciles."

And all of this is in response to someone's claim that the UN didn't authorize our invasion of Iraq? Really?

You suggest that opponents of the war suffer from a lack of resolve or of memory. But let me propose an alternative explanation - - many people opposed the invasion of Iraq from the outset. (If memory serves, I think I was probably "on the fence," though I'll never trust our government's "case" for a war again.) Then they found out that all of the "intelligence" about WMD and almost every suggestion of an Al Qaeda connection was wrong. Now, there's a lot of debate about the assignment of fault for those failures, but even if they were perfectly innocent - - it's only natural that more people would regret the invasion when they found out that a major justification (at least insofar as the case was made to the American public and Congress) was false.

Try to remember also that we were assured that we'd be "treated as liberators" by the Iraqi people, and that once the military objectives were (quickly) achieved, there would be no need for significant troop levels in Iraq. I'm thinking now of the VP's Meet the Press interview 3/16/03. When that didn't happen, isn't it probable that many people would regret the initial decision?

Irag had no weapons of mass destruction and none of the 9/11 terrorists that attacked america were from Iraq. Of the 19 terrorists. 15 were from Saudi Arabia, 2 were from United Arab Emirates, 1 was from Egypt, 1 was from Lebanon. None of the terrorists were from Iraq.